I was in eServices, curious why I'm not getting ANY requests to approve for Cadet Uniforms from our newest cadets.

Noticed the report, and saw that it's...quite lacking. It showed me 1 cadet from March of last year as "completed" request, and showed me 5 cadets (one from 2013!!!), 4 from December who are in "sent to AAFES" status.

So question is...How does one find out when uniforms are/are not available?How does one follow up on pending requests if they are available?Why don't people do the requests, especially since the link to the section is part of our "Welcome" email to new cadet members?

I don't have a answer to your questions, but on a related note, it was just mentioned at the Winter Command Council meeting about the adoption in the very near future of the Curry Blues Voucher Program. This program will replace the FCU and give a $100.00 voucher to cadets to use at Vanguard.

[But in either case, I've got a lot of new cadets (yay!), who need uniforms (boo!), and I'm not sure if I should send them out to source on their own.

I just received a FCU uniform that I ordered for a cadet in October, so you might want to have them source them on their own.

Hence the voucher system may actually be of benefit.

But more details WOULD be nice. Are cadet dues going to go up? Is VG giving us any break on the pricing?

And my big question - why hasn't someone done a "package" item, called "new cadet startup kit", that includes everything they need (name tapes, name plate, flight cover device, etc etc), so you choose that item, type in your name as you would for the name plate/tapes, and click "buy" on that ONE item to make sure all cadets get the same start up kit, and there's no need to run around the website finding items in various categories, etc.

Would be easier on VG as well, as they could pre-package these sets, with the exception of nametapes/plates.

Hence why I suggested Ned comment. My "good idea" light went full bright when I saw that - I can think of about 5 reasons this is "less better" then what is being done today, starting with the fact that it's purported to be based on a dollar figure and not specific items. Then there is the issue of shipping, etc.

CAP obviously has the responsibility to be good guardians of our funds, and that is particularly true of the appropriated dollars entrusted to us by Congress and routed through our CAP-USAF colleagues.

The Issue: For some time our AF colleagues have been concerned that providing free uniforms to new cadets may not be the most efficient use of tax dollars when the first year retention rate for cadets hovers around 40%. Some might argue that by definition, 60% of the taxpayer-provided FCU money was sitting idle in the closets of thousands of former cadets.

(Some units are proactive about contacting former members and attempting to get uniforms returned to the squadron for re-issue, but overall "reclamation rates" for used uniforms would always be problematic.)

Complicating the issue is the lengthy fulfillment time in getting the uniforms into the hands of our cadets from the USAF vendor. Some periods were better than others, but it was not uncommon for delivery to take months instead of the days or weeks we would like.

CP developed two options to address the issue. The first option was to simply delay the free uniform until the cadet had received the Curry. This would have measurably increased the "effectiveness" of the program because Curry cadets renew at a significantly higher rate than non-Curry cadets (not very surprising when you consider what it means if a cadet arrives at the one-year anniversary without earning the Curry - it means they have ceased participating already.)

Part of option one would be accepting that cadets would complete Achievement 1 training while dressed in civvies. (Or whatever locally-designated uniforms units may create - khakis, jeans, squadron t-shirts, etc.). The downside would be learning to drill in civilian shoes, the loss of the uniform as an important training and morale tool, etc. It was hard for me to imagine pinning the all-important first stripe onto a non-uniform shirt.

Option two is similar, but with an important twist. We would again delay the "free uniform*" (more on that in a bit) until Achievement 2, but would require cadets to purchase and wear the BDU uniform during Achievement 1. This would increase the effective use of the appropriated funds by providing uniforms to cadets who will renew at much higher rates since they are invested by earning the Curry and also have invested in their BDUs. Another plus is that it raises the prestige of the blues because they have to be "earned."

The other aspect of option two is to drastically improve service and fulfillment times by switching from the AF vendor to providing a voucher that can be used at VG. That has its own plusses and minuses, of course. The upside is uniform items arriving in days instead of months; the downside is that individual uniform items will be more expensive since VG cannot sell the "issue" DPSC items. They are restricted to the higher-quality (and more expensive) commercial MILSPEC items.

So there you have it. We have extensively staffed the options, and the recommendation for option 2 went forward to the senior leadership, who have every right to accept, reject, or request further options.

As far as I know, no final decisions have been made.

Whatever guidance the senior leadership provides will almost certainly require changes to supporting regulations like the 52-16 and the 39-1. I'm confident that any proposed changes will follow the normal procedures, which typically provide time for member input to any proposed changes.

Dues increases have not been discussed, recommended, or considered as part of this process.

I don't suppose this included any suggestions that NHQ dial-back the C&Ds to vendors who can provide uniform parts and generics like nametapes and tags to help offset the increased cost to the cadets?

Of removing the "HMRS" tax, etc. from these items, specifically?

How about fixing the AAFES relationship, which would address both the cost and the access?

There's clearly an issue that needs to be addressed, but turning this into a new revenue stream for VG at the unnecessary expense of the cadets would seem like the easiest, but less compelling solution.

I don't suppose this included any suggestions that NHQ dial-back the C&Ds to vendors who can provide uniform parts and generics like nametapes and tags to help offset the increased cost to the cadets?

CAP has not, can not, and will not send C & D letters to vendors who supply "uniform parts and generics." We want members to have access to uniform items at reasonable prices. But more importantly, we neither have the authority nor the desire to do so.

Quote

How about fixing the AAFES relationship, which would address both the cost and the access?

The folks at AAFES are good, hard-working people who continue to provide CAP members with the items permitted by law and AFI. When mechanical issues arise (like credit cards acceptance on phone orders) we address the issues and work towards a solution. There are simply no "relationship issues."

Quote

There's clearly an issue that needs to be addressed, but turning this into a new revenue stream for VG at the unnecessary expense of the cadets would seem like the easiest, but less compelling solution.

Well there you've got me. Clearly, if I give a cadet a voucher for x dollars to spend at VG, I have somehow caused the cadet "unnecessary expense."

But we DO have an unnecessary expense. AAFES cost, based on a report was just shy of $67 dollars. If we're going to give cadets $100 to work with VG prices...that doesn't seem to work out.

What do you mean? If the AAFES cost is indeed $67, are you suggesting that we should restrict the VG voucher to the cadet to $67? Why would we do that?

The whole point of the program is to get uniforms into the hands of cadets in a way that is a responsible use of appropriated funds. If we saving money by not purchasing uniforms for cadets less likely to renew, why should be not distribute the "saved funds" to the cadets who ARE more likely to renew?

We get X dollars a year to implement the FCU program. We can't roll it over from year to year. And if it is not spent on the purpose for which it was appropriated, it has to be returned to Uncle Sam. Restated, there will be no increased costs over the current program since we will be spending exactly X dollars every FY as Congress and our AF colleagues want us to do.

I just went on VG and priced out the following items: Belt - $16.90Male Trousers - $59.40 //// Female Slacks OR Skirt- $54.00Short Sleeve Dress Shirt/Blouse - $47.50Flight Cap -$19.49

So the cost at VG right now, to get the items AAFES sent is actually $143.29 for male cadets and $137.89 for females.

The cost of an AAFES filled order? $63.75

So essentially, CAP is going to spend 56% more, without solving the issue with "waste" due to retention whatsoever. Cadets will have to spend between $37.89 and $43.29 MORE than they currently do.

Overall costs will go up more 116-124%

So why not a compromise? Raise cadet dues by the cost of the provided items. (I suppose if we stick with the AAFES one, it's cheaper). IF a cadet sticks around past year 2 of membership, credit their "uniform insurance" fee back (since we're trying to say they should get at least 1+ years out of it). If a cadet quits and returns everything in usable shape (maybe we need a module in eservices to track this?), then they get a refund despite not renewing.

The problem with the math is that some of the VG "cost" is actually profit.

So while it might look like zero-sum to the GAO, it comes at the expense of the cadet and to the advantage of a private business.

Personally, I have always thought it would be a good idea to restrict the FCU to Curry, I just don't know how yo make that work in the existing paradigm, and since there's no actual requirement or time limiton Curry, you could have cadets in "khakis" (which in the real-world of conflict-averse Unit CCs will equal "whatever")for months if not years.

The problem with the math is that some of the VG "cost" is actually profit.

True enough.

But I think the GAO understands that pretty much every vendor providing goods and services to Uncle Sam has some "profit" in the numbers. Cuz otherwise there would be no vendors providing goods and services to Uncle Sam.

And if CAP can find another vendor that can provide MILSPEC AF service uniforms in cadet sizes at a better price with comparable service, I can't imagine why we wouldn't use them.

Quote

Personally, I have always thought it would be a good idea to restrict the FCU to Curry, I just don't know how yo make that work in the existing paradigm, and since there's no actual requirement or time limiton Curry, you could have cadets in "khakis" (which in the real-world of conflict-averse Unit CCs will equal "whatever")for months if not years.

I think we agree that cadets should be in uniform as early as possible. Uniform wear is the first listed "Key Traits of Cadet Life" in para 1-3 of the 52-16. I literally cannot imagine our cadet program without AF uniforms.

But assuming our leaders have adopted option 2, new cadets will be working on Achievement 1 in BDUs rather than khakis. Look for a formal announcement of the new program to come out next week. We'll all know the details then.

And Capt Hatkevich, your comparison of AAFES and VG prices is not really an "apples to apples" comparison for reasons I described above. AAFES sells the "issue" DPSC items (which I think are the prices you quoted), while VG sells the higher quality MILSPEC commercial items. (Which AAFES also sells for significantly higher prices than the DPSC items.)

But I can only agree that VG will never be as cheap as AAFES, simply because it cannot be.

The other factor we considered is the lengthy (some would say unacceptable) lag time in fulfillment from AAFES, which was measured in months. VG service is almost "Amazon-like" in delivery times. Indeed, our analysis suggested that part of the problem with retention rates may have been directly tied to the 10 week FCU delivery times. Cadets really appreciate the uniform and all that it represents.

But I must confess I still don't understand how raising cadet dues to cover aspects of the FCU would help the situation. Could you explain?

And Capt Hatkevich, your comparison of AAFES and VG prices is not really an "apples to apples" comparison for reasons I described above.

It doesn't have to be "apples to apples" on quality. Parents will see it as $$ to $$$, and that's all that matters. Whether the items are better quality or not, fact remains, last week a cadet *in theory* paid his dues, and could get a uniform.

When the new program starts, the cadet will pay his dues, get a voucher, and then have to pay additional money to get those same items, quality differences notwithstanding.

VG service is almost "Amazon-like" in delivery times. Indeed, our analysis suggested that part of the problem with retention rates may have been directly tied to the 10 week FCU delivery times. Cadets really appreciate the uniform and all that it represents.

Perhaps, but I think a lot of it is also "Not for me", which typically comes out 3 months into membership.

Look for a formal announcement of the new program to come out next week.

Which will hopefully include either a requisite update to 39-1 or at at least an ICL, as Commandersare currently barred from mandating any uniform for cadets which is not issued. For cash-strapped momslooking for a loop-hole, this will be an issue.

The sad fact is that the ground-level impact of this is minimal, because while CAP has promised a free uniformforever, the number of cadets who actually get one, for various reasons ranging from funding, program administration issues(at all levels), or simply the lack of requesting one, is decidedly less then 100%.

Couple that with how fast kids grow, and it isn't unusual for cadets to finally get an FCU well past their being able to wear it, at which point it either goes into the unit storeroom or back to CAP with a new size request and more waiting.

Perhaps a national program by which units were mandated to report all serviceable uniforms on hand, which could then be requested by other members. There is a lot of cloth sitting in backrooms, never to be worn.

A decent IT guy, or the average 12 year old, could cobble a request system together in a few hours, let the recipient pay flat rate shipping, done.

It doesn't have to be "apples to apples" on quality. Parents will see it as $$ to $$$, and that's all that matters. Whether the items are better quality or not, fact remains, last week a cadet *in theory* paid his dues, and could get a uniform.

Agreed - it's just a blue shirt to them, and most cadets can't wear them more then a year before they out grow them.

It's a different story for adults.

Perhaps it's time to make some phone calls and let VG sell the issue gear, allowing them to leverage their ecommerce back end for distribution.

Where do ROTC and JROTC, not to mention Academy cadets getting theirs?

Good question. Since JROTC and ROTC are actual AF entities, they simply use the existing AF supply system just like any other AF unit. They requisition things which sit in the supply room until they are issued out to their cadets. And as attractive as that sounds, it simply isn't an option for us.

Quote

The sad fact is that the ground-level impact of this is minimal, because while CAP has promised a free uniformforever, the number of cadets who actually get one, for various reasons ranging from funding, program administration issues(at all levels), or simply the lack of requesting one, is decidedly less then 100%.

Absolutely true. Which is a good reason to upgrade the program. While we have always been grateful to Congress and our AF colleagues for the FCU, there are issues associated with the existing program. But you are absolutely correct that the FCU "Rate" is well under 100%. (I'm at work and don't have the number handy.) Some units simply don't participate as a matter of local policy. Some units have existing supplies of uniforms, and can get uniforms into the hands of cadets far more quickly than relying on the old FCU.

Quote

Perhaps a national program by which units were mandated to report all serviceable uniforms on hand, which could then be requested by other members. There is a lot of cloth sitting in backrooms, never to be worn.

A decent IT guy, or the average 12 year old, could cobble a request system together in a few hours, let the recipient pay flat rate shipping, done.

Not a bad idea, but we'd have to scrub the numbers pretty carefully. I could see shipping (even at "flat rate") fairly quickly eating up the cost of a "free" used shirt, for instance. But I could see it working for larger quantities.

Some other good news: I understand that using the voucher will take the cadet / Mom / Dad directly to a special page at VG that will offer discounted uniform "packages" designed to make most efficient use of the voucher. But again, this is a bit premature since the official announcement and program description will be released next week.

Any chance of the NHQ CP team also writing up the "bare bones" required accessories list for uniforms (name tapes/plates/cover devices, etc), and asking VG to make a "add to cart" ready package as well?

Folks, when you try to compare Military Clothing Sales prices vs Vanguard just remember one little thing.Military Clothing Sales can sell you the "issue" uniform items while Vanguard can not. i.e. the $16 short sleeve blues shirt vs the $36 shirt.If you want the lowest prices you have to shop at the Military Clothing Sales at AAFES.

Folks, when you try to compare Military Clothing Sales prices vs Vanguard just remember one little thing.Military Clothing Sales can sell you the "issue" uniform items while Vanguard can not. i.e. the $16 short sleeve blues shirt vs the $36 shirt.If you want the lowest prices you have to shop at the Military Clothing Sales at AAFES.

Perhaps a national program by which units were mandated to report all serviceable uniforms on hand, which could then be requested by other members. There is a lot of cloth sitting in backrooms, never to be worn.

A decent IT guy, or the average 12 year old, could cobble a request system together in a few hours, let the recipient pay flat rate shipping, done.

Not a bad idea, but we'd have to scrub the numbers pretty carefully. I could see shipping (even at "flat rate") fairly quickly eating up the cost of a "free" used shirt, for instance. But I could see it working for larger quantities.

Some other good news: I understand that using the voucher will take the cadet / Mom / Dad directly to a special page at VG that will offer discounted uniform "packages" designed to make most efficient use of the voucher. But again, this is a bit premature since the official announcement and program description will be released next week.

I got to toss out the BS flag on this one Ned.

First off.....what's in it for me. Sorry that sounds like I'm not a team player....but we are busy at the Nellis Comp Squadron. I don't have time, nor do my supply guys have time, to inventory my uniforms, report that inventory to NHQ and keep that report up to date.....just so that NHQ can say "Send three size 15 short sleeve shirts to the Homer J. Simpson Cadet Squadron by next Tuesday."

We spend a lot of time begging, borrowing and stealing to keep our uniform room supplied. We are open with anyone in or out of our squadron who needs a uniform.

But I just don't see the return on investment if we were to do this.

Now.....I would support the concept that maybe at the wing level.....the wing works the same contacts we do on base, that Wing maintain the supply in a facility that they somehow get and everyone in the wing has access to. But a NHQ mandate on the squadrons to do that....so that they can send the uniforms to all over. That will result in local units NOT reporting any uniforms they have on hand. Not unless the units get some sort of return on their effort.

I don't have time, nor do my supply guys have time, to inventory my uniforms, report that inventory to NHQ and keep that report up to date.....just so that NHQ can say "Send three size 15 short sleeve shirts to the Homer J. Simpson Cadet Squadron by next Tuesday."

Again, something already supposed to be done, unless you're saying you're sitting on a room full of corporate property and have no idea what is there.

You should already have a full inventory. sending it somewhere is a trivial process, and maybe it would be your people >asking<.

Perhaps a national program by which units were mandated to report all serviceable uniforms on hand, which could then be requested by other members. There is a lot of cloth sitting in backrooms, never to be worn.

A decent IT guy, or the average 12 year old, could cobble a request system together in a few hours, let the recipient pay flat rate shipping, done.

Not a bad idea, but we'd have to scrub the numbers pretty carefully. I could see shipping (even at "flat rate") fairly quickly eating up the cost of a "free" used shirt, for instance. But I could see it working for larger quantities.

Some other good news: I understand that using the voucher will take the cadet / Mom / Dad directly to a special page at VG that will offer discounted uniform "packages" designed to make most efficient use of the voucher. But again, this is a bit premature since the official announcement and program description will be released next week.

I got to toss out the BS flag on this one Ned.

First off.....what's in it for me. Sorry that sounds like I'm not a team player....but we are busy at the Nellis Comp Squadron. I don't have time, nor do my supply guys have time, to inventory my uniforms, report that inventory to NHQ and keep that report up to date.....just so that NHQ can say "Send three size 15 short sleeve shirts to the Homer J. Simpson Cadet Squadron by next Tuesday."

We spend a lot of time begging, borrowing and stealing to keep our uniform room supplied. We are open with anyone in or out of our squadron who needs a uniform.

But I just don't see the return on investment if we were to do this.

Now.....I would support the concept that maybe at the wing level.....the wing works the same contacts we do on base, that Wing maintain the supply in a facility that they somehow get and everyone in the wing has access to. But a NHQ mandate on the squadrons to do that....so that they can send the uniforms to all over. That will result in local units NOT reporting any uniforms they have on hand. Not unless the units get some sort of return on their effort.

Wing has no more time or staff than the squadrons have to accomplish this. As for a central location, The geographically large wings - CA, TX, FA, and even NV, would be seriously hampered in their ability to distribute the uniforms. Are you willing to drive 14 hrs round trip to fetch uniforms from the central storage area that just happens to be in Reno this year?

I don't have time, nor do my supply guys have time, to inventory my uniforms, report that inventory to NHQ and keep that report up to date.....just so that NHQ can say "Send three size 15 short sleeve shirts to the Homer J. Simpson Cadet Squadron by next Tuesday."

Again, something already supposed to be done, unless you're saying you're sitting on a room full of corporate property and have no idea what is there.

You should already have a full inventory. sending it somewhere is a trivial process, and maybe it would be your people >asking<.

Of course if you send someone a shirt, then you'd only have two.

No..sorry....not so...don't have to inventory it. Don't have to report it. It does not meet the dollar value threshold for expendable property.

Again. Adding work to the squadrons is not the way to fix problems.

Like I said. I'm all for sharing with squadrons and people in need. But mandating a full inventory of uniforms on hand.....and the manpower to keep that up to date......my supply guys would walk out on me.

Wing has no more time or staff than the squadrons have to accomplish this. As for a central location, The geographically large wings - CA, TX, FA, and even NV, would be seriously hampered in their ability to distribute the uniforms. Are you willing to drive 14 hrs round trip to fetch uniforms from the central storage area that just happens to be in Reno this year?

I agree. Wing is in no better state then we are at the squadron level.

I was suggesting that as an alternative to mandating it on to each and every squadron. And also by limiting the distribution.....the ROI is a little more visible. Southern Nevada does a uniform drive and sends them to the central storage facility (which could be on Nellis BTW....no one said it had to be co-located with wing HQ.....just that it had to be run by them). We know it will be used by NVWG members.

Managing members is too much work, inventorying corporate property is too much work.

But implementing an NCO corps, that fixes CAP.

Right.

Ad hominem attacks Eclipse....I'm shocked....shocked I say!

But since you asked......the implementing of the NCO corps does not add any more burden on the units then any other type of membership does......ergo any benefits that may come from an NCO corps is more or less free from the unit point of view.

As for "fixes CAP".....I thought we just talking about the long response times of the FCU, the high costs of Vanguard, the sketchy access to MCSS, and the snafu of AAFES online services.

If we want to talk about "fixing CAP", I suggest that you start another thread....clearly state the problems and then we can have a free for all.

A cadet in IDWG can't have a shirt because NVWG wants to maintain inventory?

NVWG is the one doing the work. We are the ones going to our contacts on base, we are the ones going through the inventory, we are the ones QCing the uniforms and throwing out the bad ones. We are the finding a storage location, storing the uniforms, maintaining the inventory.

The cadets from IDWG can do the same thing as we do.

Relevance is the return of investment. We do the work.....we need to see the pay off. Now if NHQ were to "buy" the uniforms from us. Maybe we could then turn it into a fund raising venture. Maybe.

Like I said....in my first post "what's in it for me?"

And before you say anything about it being "CAP property"........all I got to say about that is WING BANKER.

It is the same deal. Squadron X...works hard to make their money. They get the donations, they wash the cars, they pay their dues. Why don't we send this ti the poor kids in IDWG?

Why only AAFES or Vanguard are the only sources of uniforms for cadets? In EVERY Wing there are multiple other sources available. I'm referring to Universities with an AFROTC program, and High Schools with a AFJROTC program. Holm Center sent a memo several years ago on disposing of surplus uniroms for SAFROTC and AFJROTC. These units can only dispose of surplus uniforms by sending them back to DRMO or donating them to Civil Air Patrol. How many Squadrons have even contacted the ROTC units about obtaining the surplus uniforms, and more often than not the surplus includes shoes. Granted, the surplus uniforms are blues only no, ACU, no BDU, but this gives a new cadet the basic uniform the day he/she submits their application if the Squadron(s) cobntacts the ROTC unit for the surplus. (which are washed before they are turned in)

Why only AAFES or Vanguard are the only sources of uniforms for cadets? In EVERY Wing there are multiple other sources available. I'm referring to Universities with an AFROTC program, and High Schools with a AFJROTC program. Holm Center sent a memo several years ago on disposing of surplus uniroms for SAFROTC and AFJROTC. These units can only dispose of surplus uniforms by sending them back to DRMO or donating them to Civil Air Patrol. How many Squadrons have even contacted the ROTC units about obtaining the surplus uniforms, and more often than not the surplus includes shoes. Granted, the surplus uniforms are blues only no, ACU, no BDU, but this gives a new cadet the basic uniform the day he/she submits their application if the Squadron(s) cobntacts the ROTC unit for the surplus. (which are washed before they are turned in)

You wouldn't happen to have a copy of that memo, would you?

Logged

If you are confident in you abilities and experience, whether someone else is impressed is irrelevant. - Eclipse

There's a problem with uniforms acquired from ROTC sources: the bits we need most - pants and shirts - are the ones least suitable for wear, due to condition. My old unit used to go to the local AFJROTC unit and pick up their excess uniforms. If we were lucky, one shirt in four was wearable. The rest had horrible stains in the usual places, or were damaged where patches or insignia had been worn. We ended up doing their disposal work for them.

There's a problem with uniforms acquired from ROTC sources: the bits we need most - pants and shirts - are the ones least suitable for wear, due to condition. My old unit used to go to the local AFJROTC unit and pick up their excess uniforms. If we were lucky, one shirt in four was wearable. The rest had horrible stains in the usual places, or were damaged where patches or insignia had been worn. We ended up doing their disposal work for them.

+1 - The service coats are usually serviceable, except for the shoulder patch, but ROTC and JROTC cadets wear their uniforms a lot more then CAP cadets.

Also, in trying to find the Holmes center memo referenced, I did find a discussion here on CT that indicated that as far back as 2011 it was suggested at the NEC that uniforms not be issued until after the first year of cadet membership.

BillBB - all I could find was an earlier comment from you saying the same thing, but nothing beyond that.

I will say, required or otherwise, that ROTC units have always been generous to CAP when asked, at least in my AOR.

Another question - in cases where a cadet is dual-enrolled, are they getting a free uniform from both sides? Nothing wrong with that idea, per se, but certainly a place where some cooperation could save money for one or the other.

Edit: The only reference to CAP in AFJROTCI 36-2001 is in regards to disposal ofoutdated curriculum material, there is no mention of uniforms.